## Facts

- A vehicle driven by Stella Maychick entered Washington Square Park in Manhattan on April 23, 1992, injuring multiple pedestrians; related personal-injury actions were consolidated.
- Plaintiffs sued Maychick (owner/driver) and General Motors Corporation (manufacturer).
- Maychick, an elderly client, retained counsel with substantial assistance from her adult daughter, Diana, who selected the law firm, transported Maychick, and attended all attorney meetings.
- During discovery, General Motors sought deposition testimony about Maychick’s communications with her attorneys that occurred in Diana’s presence.
- General Motors argued the communications were not privileged because the daughter’s presence defeated confidentiality.

## Issues

1. Whether communications between an elderly client and her attorneys remain protected by attorney-client privilege when the client’s adult daughter is present to assist with retaining counsel and facilitating communication.
2. Whether, under CPLR 4503(a), the daughter’s presence negated the client’s reasonable expectation of confidentiality so as to permit compelled disclosure in discovery.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division, First Department reversed the order compelling disclosure.
- The court held the attorney-client privilege applied to the communications despite the daughter’s presence.
- The court concluded that, given the circumstances and the daughter’s facilitating role, the client maintained a reasonable expectation of confidentiality.

## Legal Principles

- Under CPLR 4503(a), attorney-client privilege turns on whether the client reasonably expected the communication to be confidential under the circumstances.
- A third party’s presence does not automatically waive privilege where the third party functions as an agent or facilitator of attorney-client communications or otherwise assists counsel’s representation.
- Privilege determinations are fact-specific; courts assess the third party’s role and the client’s need for assistance in communicating with counsel.
- Where a third party provides practical and emotional support needed for effective attorney-client communication (and may assist in reconstructing events relevant to representation), confidentiality may remain intact.

## Conclusion

The court preserved the attorney-client privilege for an elderly defendant’s communications with counsel conducted in the presence of her adult daughter, because the daughter’s participation was reasonably necessary to facilitate the attorney-client relationship and did not defeat the client’s reasonable expectation of confidentiality.


Stroh v. Gen. Motors Corp., 213 A.D.2d 267, 623 N.Y.S.2d 873 (App. Div. 1st Dep’t 1995)